论教育目的的公平转型

项贤明

doi:10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2017.02.003

论教育目的的公平转型

doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2017.02.003

项贤明

南京师范大学教育科学学院, 南京 210097

计量
- 文章访问数: 187
- HTML全文浏览量: 266
- PDF下载量: 0
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 刊出日期: 2017-04-20

Equity Transition of Educational Purpose

XIANG Xianming

School of Educational Sciences, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210097

摘要

摘要: 公平和教育公平都是历史的概念。关于教育公平的学术探讨可以从多个学科维度在不同层面上展开。在教育公平问题上, 人的自由发展具有优先性的原则是实现教育公平的基本前提。教育质量的难以测量决定了我们很难真正在质量意义上来谈教育公平, 择校或均衡化也不能真正保障教育公平, 人在教育中的自由选择才是教育公平的关键。现实社会中的人和教育的关系发生了异化, 人在教育中被工具化即是教育异化的重要表现之一, 也是妨害教育公平的根本原因。克服教育异化的基本途径就是将人本身当作教育目的, 这是人的教育本质的要求, 也是社会主义和共产主义的内在要求。社会主义的教育目的应当且必须将人的自由发展作为其核心内涵。
- 教育目的 /
- 教育公平 /
- 人的发展 /
- 教育学
Abstract: Equity and educational equity are historical concepts, with different connotations in the historical contexts. Educational equity, closely related to social equity, is an educational and public policy issue. Educational equity can be explored from the perspectives of politics, sociology, ethics and pedagogy. Studies can also be conducted at the level of implementation, social structure and core values. Freedom being priority among equity principles, human's free development has its priority over educational equity. On the one hand, educational quality is hard to measure; on the other hand, educational equity is hardly guaranteed by school-choice and equalization, where the key is human's freedom to choose in education."Freedom" here refers to its authenticity but not unconditional indulgence. If we draw a John Rowel's"Veil of Ignorance" for all school-choosing people, and no one knows how his/her choice influences future development. Then, educational choice reflects the authenticity of freedom and everyone can choose from their interests and expectation for their future development. However, there is an alienated relationship between human being and their education in modern society. Human being is considered as a tool. Educational purpose has changed from human's development to upward social mobility, which has deprived humans of their freedom in education choice. This is the fundamental cause to impair educational equity. The solution to educational alienation is to make human as educational purpose, which is essential in socialist and communist education. Freedom is a fundamental principle for educational equity.Educational equity won't happen if one's freedom is limited by a state's compulsory power. Human's free development is a fundamental principle. Educational equity recognizes natural equality and that free development for all is educational purpose. The inclusive and diversified education helps all develop their interest and potential. Performance of education shouldn't be evaluated by upward social mobility. Communist society is expected to diminish human's self-alienation and in socialist society, educational purpose should be human's free development as its key connotation.
- educational purpose /
- educational equity /
- human's development /
- pedagogy

HTML全文

参考文献(38)

[1]	阿马蒂亚·森. (2012). 正义的理念(王磊等译). 北京: 中国人民大学出版社.
[2]	戴维·米勒. (2001). 社会正义原则(应奇译). 南京: 江苏人民出版社.
[3]	恩格斯. (1979). 社会主义从空想到科学的发展. 中央编译局. 马克思恩格斯全集: 第19卷. 北京: 人民出版社.
[4]	恩格斯. (1979). 自然辩证法. 中央编译局. 马克思恩格斯全集: 第20卷. 北京: 人民出版社.
[5]	高清海主编. (1987). 马克思主义哲学基础(下册). 北京: 人民出版社.
[6]	哈耶克. (1999). 自由宪章(杨玉生等译). 北京: 中国社会科学出版社.
[7]	何怀宏.(2002).公平的正义:解读罗尔斯《正义论》.济南:山东人民出版社.
[8]	康德. (1986). 道德形而上学原理(苗力田译). 上海: 上海人民出版社.
[9]	康德. (2003). 实践理性批判(邓晓芒译). 北京: 人民出版社.
[10]	康德. (2010). 教育学. 李秋零主编. 康德著作全集: 第9卷. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社.
[11]	科恩. (2014). 拯救正义与平等(陈伟译). 上海: 复旦大学出版社.
[12]	科亨. (2008). 自我所有、自由和平等(李朝晖译). 北京: 东方出版社.
[13]	卢梭. (1962). 论人类不平等的起源和基础(李常山译). 北京: 商务印书馆.
[14]	罗尔斯. (1988). 正义论(何怀宏等译). 中国社会科学出版社.
[15]	罗尔斯. (2002). 作为公平的正义——正义新论(姚大志译). 上海: 上海三联书店.
[16]	马克思. (1979). 1844年经济学哲学手稿. 中央编译局. 马克思恩格斯全集: 第42卷. 北京: 人民出版社.
[17]	马克思. (1979). 经济学手稿 (1857—1858年). 中央编译局. 马克思恩格斯全集: 第46卷下册. 北京: 人民出版社.
[18]	马克思. (2004). 资本论: 第3卷(中央编译局译). 北京: 人民出版社.
[19]	马克思和恩格斯. (1979). 神圣家族. 中央编译局. 马克思恩格斯全集: 第2卷. 北京: 人民出版社.
[20]	马克思和恩格斯. (1997). 共产党宣言(中央编译局译). 北京: 人民出版社.
[21]	米尔顿·弗里德曼, 罗斯·弗里德曼. (1982). 自由选择(胡骑等译). 北京: 商务印书馆.
[22]	王海明.(2008).新伦理学.北京:商务印书馆.
[23]	亚里士多德. (2003). 尼各马可伦理学(廖申白译注). 北京: 商务印书馆.
[24]	姚大志. (2002). 导读: 从正义论到正义新论. 罗尔斯. 作为公平的正义——正义新论(姚大志译). 上海: 上海三联书店.
[25]	Baker, J.(2015).Conceptions and Dimensions of Social Equality. in Fourie, C., Schuppert, F. and Wallimann-Belmer, I. (eds.).Social Quality: On What It Means to Be Equals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[26]	Cooper, D. E.(2010).Illusions of Equality. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
[27]	Fourie, C., Schuppert, F., and Wallimann-Belmer, I.(2015).The Nature and Distinctiveness of Social Equality: An Introduction. in Fourie, C., Schuppert, F., and Wallimann-Belmer, I. (eds.).Social Quality: On What It Means to Be Equals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[28]	Flannery, K. and Marcus, J.(2012).The Creation of Inequality: How Our Prehistoric Ancestors Set the Stage for Monarchy, Slavery, and Empire. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
[29]	Inckle, K.(2012).Embodying Diversity: Pedagogies of Transformation. in Taylor, Y. (ed.).Educational Diversity: The Subject of Difference and Different Subjects. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
[30]	Klees, S. T., Qargha, O.(2014).教育公平:联合国儿童基金会的案例及参与式讨论的必要.教育展望.44(3).
[31]	Ladd, H. and Loeb, S.(2013). The Challenges of Measuring School Quality: Implications for Educational Equality. in Allen, D. and Reich, R. (eds.).Education, Justice, and Democracy. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
[32]	Nozick, R.(1974).Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books, Inc.
[33]
[34]	OECD. (2007).The Ten Steps-Executive Summary.in Field, S., Kuczera, M. and Pont, B.No More Failures: Ten Steps to Equity in Education. Paris: OECD Publishing.
[35]	Peterson, P. E.(ed.) (2003). The Future of School Choice, California: Hoover Institution Press, Stanford University.
[36]	Reich, R. B.(2008).Work of Nations: Preparing Ourselves for 21st-Century Capitalism. See in Weis, L.(ed.).The Way Class Works: Readings on School, Family, and the Economy. New York and London: Routledge.
[37]	Sterba, J. P.(2014).From Rationality to Equality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[38]	UNICEF.(2010).Re-focusing on Equity: Questions and Answers. New York: UNICEF.